TERRETRANSTerretrans and Terretrane are about lift-generating fuselages designs. Whereas terreplane is based on use of zipline-type guideways, terretrans is based on using lift-generating fuselages to substantially improve aircraft fuel economy, substantially reduce takeoff velocities, and bring in an era of ultra-low-cost battery-powered aircraft for 100+ mile corridors. The goals of Terretrans are:

Double the fuel economy of average commercial aircraft (achieve lift-to-drag ratios of 23-30 for commercial aircraft),

Achieve takeoff and landing velocities of 50 miles per hour and takeoff distances of about 50 meters (no airports),

Through L:D ratios, enable battery-powered aircraft for 100-600 mile transit at ultra-low cost due to lower cost and maintenance of electric motors,

Enable operation outside airports from dozens of locations in cities (20-passenger aircraft as standard), and

Enable this new air transit to operate with advantages of helicopters but lower costs, faster, and farther.

These advantages enable lower transit times illustrated by the below diagram.

Terretrans is a technology targeting the reduction of airline transit times by 50% to 75% by eliminating times spent in security lines, early arrival to departure gates, flight transfers, and travel to/from the airport. The ultimate goal is to enable takeoff and landing form 0.25 km sections of 2-lane highways that can be blocked off for 20-second intervals for Terretrans airliners to take off and land in downtown areas and population centers within walking distance of many customers. High performance with near-zero infrastructure cost.

versus ALTERNATIVESThe following are shortcomings of other options the might be considered competitive with Terretrans:

Flying Cars - have poor fuel economy (low L:D) and are typically limited to less than 100 miles range.

Flying Uber - have poor fuel economy (low L:D) and are typically limited to less than 100 miles range.

High L:D ratios is the key technology that enables Terretrans to expand what is possible in transportation.

Why BATTERIESBatteries allow ultra-low-cost aircraft operation since electric motors are less expensive than aircraft engines and require less maintenance. The removal of liquid fuel from the aircraft reduces security concerns and improves safety. Electricity would typically eliminate the need for a fuel supply infrastructure. Operation is preferably autonomous to remove the pilot from the aircraft and further increase security.

HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE?Our world's aircraft industry exists in what may be one of the biggest technology paradigms of modern technology. That paradigm is that the flying wing would provide the ultimate lift-to-drag ratios for aircraft; and in this assumption, the industry has overlooked using fuselage surfaces to add to the lift created by wings for an aircraft (when cruising, fuselages assist takeoff lift). This is a conclusion of three years of research on the Terreplane project that has been addressing the issue of lift for a land-based tethered-glider transportation system where the vehicles rely primarily on the fuselage to generate lift. See above image.

As is common, big breakthroughs emerge when addressing a problem from a different angle. Effective incorporation of lift-generating surfaces on fuselages could double the fuel economies of aircraft and bring in the era of ultra-low-cost battery-powered autonomous aircraft.

It is a serious matter that typical tubular fuselages have zero lift generation. As with most engineering applications, there is a point of diminishing returns. The incorporation of “zero” lift generating surfaces on fuselages is nowhere near the point of diminishing return for aircraft design. This is a classic paradigm.What is that paradigm that has held back our airline industry? Modern aircraft have substantially missed the opportunity to use the fuselage as a lift-generating body. When using the fuselage to generate lift, fuel economy can double ... and much more ... details in below pdf file.

​Theory Behind the Science

An approach of applying a volume integral to air's acceleration around an aircraft yields two inherently meaningful results of: 1) during equilibrium flight the net downward "ma" (mass times acceleration) of air is equal to the gravitational force acting on the aircraft and 2) insightful interpretations of lift can be attained by inspection of airfoil surfaces and the manner in which those surface force air upward versus downward.This work advocates the replace of paradigms with new approaches as follows:

The paradigm that increased air velocity (with resulting lower pressure) above wings is what causes lift should be replaced with the recognition that lift is created by the manner in which air foils cause downward acceleration of air.

The paradigm that large wing aspect ratios are needed for high L/D ratios should be replaced with the heuristic that walls (e.g. wider wings, winglets) increase lift by strategically preserving pockets of high/low pressure air.

The paradigm that a wing's surface area and respective lift coefficient are the best way to characterize lift should be replaced with a lift efficiency based on longitudinal cross-sectional area.

As with any paradigm that has crippled an industry, there are many excuses as to why certain paths of improvement were not pursued. However, good engineering is not about excuses; good engineering is about risk-benefit analyses. Thorough risk-benefit analyses are beyond the scope of this paper. The scope of this paper is to identify a simplified explanation of flight that is simple enough to provide insight into the design process. That explanation includes the presentation of Equation 2, heuristics to assist in applying Equation 2, and the defining of lift efficiency as a more-meaningful term for characterizing airfoils and complex aircraft.

A pdf of the complete paper is available to right/below.

This paper is under peer review for publication. When accepted for publication, the attached pdf will be replaced with a reference to that publication.